National Occupational Standards for Kilts

[Smayniac]

I thought I saw in another thread, I think an older one, a post by M.A.C. Newsome saying that MOST early kilts were pleated to the stripe and pleating to sett became the norm in the 20th century. I agree that something like other European nations use regarding regional specialties might not be inappropriate, the notion that a "traditional kilt" is pleated one way seems naive at best. Has the length of a kilt always been standardized as well?

It would seem that a military standard would be the most accurate way of determining "tradition" as such organizations are quite traditional in custom and frequently have written standards that are preserved through the years and the generations.

Bob

[dowofbuchanan]

i think the whole thing is B*ll*cks i never liked the idea that i can make a better brandy than the french yet theres is better because its cognac ... i think barb could make just as lovely a kilt as our friend on the bbc ... and i like knife pleats better. they are just working themselves not scotland... also if they set these regulations they may be able to force legislation

[Mr. MacDougall]

also if they set these regulations they may be able to force legislation

And, in what way will Scottish, or even UK legislation affect you, in Missouri?

[Phil]

And, in what way will Scottish, or even UK legislation affect you, in Missouri?

Exactly - there is no threat to anyone in this unless you come over from Missouri to Scotland and try selling Missouri-made kilts here as genuine Scottish kilts. Or try selling them as Scottish kilts in Missouri. I'm sure nobody will be interested otherwise so you are quite safe wearing whatever kilt you like. Nobody will try to confiscate it I am sure.

[ThistleDown]

I don't see what the fuss is about. It's a trade association, not the government, trying to maintain standards of kiltmaking.

Not quite. As I am sure many of you are aware, application has been made to the EU for exclusivity of the term "Scottish Kilt" somewhat along the line of "Champagne": if the fabric is not wool, was not woven in Scotland, not hand-sewn and not made in Scotland it is not a "Scottish kilt". If this is approved and adopted by the EU (and there are lots of reasons why it might not be) all that means is that the champagne of kilts will have to be called sparkling or something if any part of it is made somewhere other than Scotland. Call it what you want, in other words, but don't deceive the public by calling it a Scottish Kilt if the fabric is woven in Pakistan, the kilt is sewn in Timbuctu, the wholesaler is in Hong Kong and only the retailer is in Paisley or Renfrew or Edinburgh. Why would anybody disagree with this?

[ThistleDown]

If there are set standards for something to be called a "Traditional Scottish Kilt"

No, Jamie, that's not quite it. The press has focused on the kilt as a "traditional" garment for this reportage, but that's not what the kafafel is all about. Scottish kilt-makers are not concerned about the depth of pleats, pleating to the stripe (or not), or any of that stuff. That they resolve withb their customers. What they want ensured is that something that says "Scotland" on it was Scottish in origin. It doesn't matter if it is "traditional" or not. I know it was somebody else in this thread and not you who said to the contrary, but this is much more important to Scots than the Levi issue was to Americans; in that case nobody cared where the denim was made, only that the brand "Levi" was honoured. That was corporate ownership. This is national pride.

[Jerry]

I agree with most.there is no way they could enforce any law like that anywhere except in the UK. It would be like Levis getting a law passed here in the USA saying that no one could call jeans made in the UK jeans. Heck, if the truth is known, Levis are probably made in Mexico anyhow.

[thanmuwa]

No, Jamie, that's not quite it. The press has focused on the kilt as a "traditional" garment for this reportage, but that's not what the kafafel is all about. Scottish kilt-makers are not concerned about the depth of pleats, pleating to the stripe (or not), or any of that stuff. That they resolve withb their customers. What they want ensured is that something that says "Scotland" on it was Scottish in origin. It doesn't matter if it is "traditional" or not. I know it was somebody else in this thread and not you who said to the contrary, but this is much more important to Scots than the Levi issue was to Americans; in that case nobody cared where the denim was made, only that the brand "Levi" was honoured. That was corporate ownership. This is national pride.

I agree. It is just the same as with Scotch Whisky or Irish Whiskey. Other people can make whiskey to their heart's content (the Japanese are getting particularly good at making an equivalent to scotch) just nobody else is allowed to use that name.

[katmills2005]

Here is how this could effect someone in the US...

Your kilt, the one you made yourself, worked so hard on, would not be considered a Scottish kilt.

The kilt you ordered from Stillwater, USA Kilts, Freedom Kilts, Sportkilt, would not be considered a Scottish kilt.

The Kilt you had made by Barb, Matt, or another talented kilt maker, would not be considered a Scottish kilt.

While I agree there should be standards in place, I'm not sure I like the proposed definition of what should be a kilt. I agree that the artisans of Scotland should be able to protect the art they create in these kilts, I don't believe it should disqualify other quality kilts. It sounds good in theory, but I'm not quite sold on the idea anymore than I think French Champagne and Cognac is better than what is made elsewhere, or that Georgia sweet onions are better than Texas sweet onions.

[Caddy One]

IMHO ....I agree with the article..............